It seems a bit of a stretch to arrest someone for disorderly conduct in their own home when that person exercises a legal right to verify the badge number of the police officer. Even if Gates was "uppity" about it, there is no law against being a jerk, since that right is protected by the 1st Amendment, especially in the privacy of one's own home.
The presented facts are that when Gates let the police into his home, he did show them a couple of ID cards, license and Harvard ID (he lives in a Harvard house). Case closed. Unless there was a physical assault by Gates there would have been zero reason to arrest him. The case was fully dropped because it had no legal basis to proceed. That is the fact of the matter. Therefore the police officer acted stupidly, by definition, since he had no just cause for arrest.
Moderator's Warning: Yes, another thread being de-railed and name calling ensues. Stay on topic, stop calling each other names and cease with the personal attacks.
The police department spokesperson said this...Link? Because this is the public statement of the department of which I am aware:
Where in that statement is there admission of mistake?
In announcing that charges would be dropped Tuesday, police blamed both sides for escalating the conflict. "You had two human beings reacting to a set of circumstances and cooler heads did not prevail," said Cambridge police spokeswoman Kelly Downes.
"It was not Professor Gates' best moment and it was not the Cambridge Police Department's best moment."
"I think both parties were wrong. Our position is race did not play a factor."
I know what nolle prosequi is, I never said that it was an admission of mistake. I said this more than "just" the DA dropping the charges. It was the police department publicly stating they were equally wrong in this incident.nolle prosequi is not an admission of mistake, merely a decision not to pursue the matter. Technically, the door is still open to pursuing the charges should the DA change his mind in the matter--granted, it's highly improbable, but it is not impossible.
nolle prosequi (Anglo-American law) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia
Well, I'm sure you would think that. I would probably think that as well. However police officers do not have the latitude to arrest people for crimes where there are no identifiable victims. He can't assume the public was alarmed, which he did, he has to prove someone in the public was actually alarmed.This is certainly not a case of shouting "fire" in a crowded theater, but a person standing outside shouting that a cop is a racist would be pretty damn alarming, I would think.
No, not at all. I have several friends in both county prosecutors offices where I live and we talk often. I specifically asked two assistant prosecutors what they thought and while they think Gates is a complete douche bag they also agree with me Crowley did a poor job documenting his case and they would never take it to trial. Simply because there wasn't enough documentation of the necessary facts.Would the case stand up at trial? Perhaps.
And the police would still be required to prove that someone in the public was actually alarmed. But please, let's not speculate on what crimes might have been charged if Gates had done this or that. Let's stick to what the report says, what the crime charged was, and the subsequent admission of wrong by the police department.If Gates had stood out on his front step for an extended period of time shouting racist accusations at Sgt Crowley, that would certainly be alarming to the public and would arguably be disturbing the peace.
Fair enough.However, the reality of the situation is that, for whatever reason, Gates lost his temper. If DAs prosecuted every person who lost their temper in public there would never be time to try rapists and murderers. Gates is not a frequent flyer at the county jail--he lost his cool. Even if he were technically guilty of disturbing the peace, how much good would be accomplished by taking the case to court? Crowley could have done everything right, including arresting Gates, and the proper response by the department and the DA could still be entering a nolle prosequi. Frankly, I don't see where Crowley did anything wrong.
You are correct, we weren't there. I have formed my opinion based upon Crowley's report, the wording of the statute, and the subsequent actions of the DA and the police department.Neither you nor I were there, so how much more there is to the case is purely speculation for us. My speculation is that Crowley properly investigated a report of a break-in at Gates' residence, Gates' improperly lost his cool at being asked for his ID to show he lived in that residence--necessary for Crowley to establish that there had been no crime committed--and Gates went too far in expressing his displeasure. That much is speculation, I freely acknowledge.
Why would the police department also make this statement?However, this statement by Cambridge Police Commissioner Robert C. Haas to my mind suggests that my speculation is reasonably close to what those better informed agree took place:
If Crowley screwed up, why would Haas be going this far in taking up for him?
In announcing that charges would be dropped Tuesday, police blamed both sides for escalating the conflict. "You had two human beings reacting to a set of circumstances and cooler heads did not prevail," said Cambridge police spokeswoman Kelly Downes.
"It was not Professor Gates' best moment and it was not the Cambridge Police Department's best moment."
"I think both parties were wrong. Our position is race did not play a factor."
Why would the police department also make this statement?
Things that make you go "hmmmm."
Like most spokespeople, she was speaking extemporaneously and probably flubbed the lines. As purely a public relations matter, she would have been on more solid ground if she had just stuck with the last sentence "Our position is race did not play a factor." Admitting any wrongdoing by Crowley is opening the door for a lawsuit. Given that the commissioner is backing Crowley, paving the way for litigation is a bad idea."I think both parties were wrong. Our position is race did not play a factor."
Note what the spokeswoman said:
Like most spokespeople, she was speaking extemporaneously and probably flubbed the lines. As purely a public relations matter, she would have been on more solid ground if she had just stuck with the last sentence "Our position is race did not play a factor." Admitting any wrongdoing by Crowley is opening the door for a lawsuit. Given that the commissioner is backing Crowley, paving the way for litigation is a bad idea.
My personal take on that line is that she was trying to appear evenhanded and sympathetic to Gates, and flubbed it.
(Kinda like Gibbs pointing out that the union for the Cambridge PD backed McCain, but instead of putting the whole foot in the mouth she just put in two toes).
Think about it. If Crowley was wrong Gates has a lawsuit. What spokeswoman worth her salt is going to hand Gates a cause of action when her boss is sticking up for Crowley? Even if Haas weren't sticking up for Crowley, saying that Crowley was wrong is a bad PR move, because it gives Gates a cause of action for a lawsuit.So in other words, your answer is "she messed up what she was supposed to say."
Lol...okay.
Obama spoke for an hour without teleprompters, answering questions on health care that would have baffled George Bush. In responding to the question about Gates, Obama rose to the defense of a friend. He lost his cool. It was a mistake for him to make a judgement.
Wow! We're talking about racism and you make an incredibly bigoted comment about tens of millions of people because they live in a certain part of the United States.Funny how the libertarians and the libertarian wing of the GOP are so silent about a guy who gets arrested in his own house. Oh forgot, they can use this to play the race card to stir up the inbreds down in Appalachia.
The man was falsely accused and treated poorly by the police, he had every right to be angry and every right to speak out.
The "crime" that he commited here was nothing more than "contempt of cop".
The cop should have simply admitted his mistake and walked away. Instead his ego got the best of him and he asked the man to step outside simply for the purpose of arresting him.
Bad cops should never be supported....it only encourages more bad cop behavior...and diminishes the service of the good officers that serve our communities daily.
The neighbors had reported a break-in in progress. Officer Crowley was simply doing his job.
Maybe Gates was frustrated that the door was jammed as a result of the previous break-in, maybe he was tired from his trip, or it could be that he's a race baiting jerk.
Whatever his reason of excuse is...he had no business treating officer Crowley as if he was doing anything other than making sure the person who was in his home had a right to be in his home.
BTW, I carry a college ID myself. They do not list your home address on them. That was just a ploy to try to show the officer how important he was...just another thing on the list of stupid moves made by this self important victim of the hour.
Crowley did not behave the way a bad cop behaves. But Gates had no problem demonstrating how a jackass behaves.
Has anyone taken the time to note the statements made by Crowley's partner? Or is that to be ignored because it just doesn't jive with Obama's idiotic statement...and makes Gates look like the race baiting drama queen he really is?
Think about it. If Crowley was wrong Gates has a lawsuit. What spokeswoman worth her salt is going to hand Gates a cause of action when her boss is sticking up for Crowley? Even if Haas weren't sticking up for Crowley, saying that Crowley was wrong is a bad PR move, because it gives Gates a cause of action for a lawsuit.
Given the circumstances, if you ran the Cambridge PD, would you want her saying "both sides were wrong"? Or just "Our position is that race was not a factor."?
No, Crowley behaved the way a pissed off, aggravated cop behaves when he's trying to teach an asshole a lesson.Crowley did not behave the way a bad cop behaves. But Gates had no problem demonstrating how a jackass behaves.
There was an entire thread dedicated to the officers comments. They are really not all that important because they simply reinforce Crowley's report. I have no issue with Crowley's description of Gates' behavior. I don't think Crowley lied. What Crowley did however was make a bad arrest. As has been explained numerous times in multiple threads, Crowley did a poor job of making his case. He reached way too far in order to take Gates to jail.Has anyone taken the time to note the statements made by Crowley's partner? Or is that to be ignored because it just doesn't jive with Obama's idiotic statement...and makes Gates look like the race baiting drama queen he really is?
No, Crowley behaved the way a pissed off, aggravated cop behaves when he's trying to teach an asshole a lesson.
There was an entire thread dedicated to the officers comments. They are really not all that important because they simply reinforce Crowley's report. I have no issue with Crowley's description of Gates' behavior. I don't think Crowley lied. What Crowley did however was make a bad arrest. As has been explained numerous times in multiple threads, Crowley did a poor job of making his case. He reached way too far in order to take Gates to jail.
Was Gates a jerk? Without a doubt. I believe Crowley was doing his job just fine up until he decided to arrest Gates on a trumped up charge.
Cops are not out on the street to "teach people lessons." They are out on the street to enforce the laws of their jurisdiction. You arrest people when they actually commit a crime. Part of the process is documenting how the offender actually commits the crime and against who. Crowley failed in that regard.
I'm sure Crowley is a fine cop, he just ****ed up in this case.
I wasn't admonishing you to research all the threads, it's just the arguments were long and drawn out and I've not got the desire to repeat them. That's all.Sorry, new to the forum. I didn't do a search of all threads that have been posted prior to my arrival before commenting.:doh
That would be a rather silly expectation of newcomers anyway.
Well, okay then I will run with it. :mrgreen:If you feel Crowley failed in some regard...I say run with it. Maybe he overreacted; maybe he did not.
And I obviously disagree, and that's okay.I feel the reason the prosecutor decided to kick the charges out is not because they weren't unprovable...he most likely did not want to deal with the press and the screaming idiot that couldn't claim racism quick enough.
I think it's pretty much the consensus all around (save a few diehards) that Obama ****ed this up big time.One thing about it Gates did succeed in making a complete ass of himself...Obama tossed the race card without having enough information to make a call but jumped on the chance to spew a little bigotry all his own while wagging his finger and lecturing the little people once again. He succeeded in showing everyone what an ass he can be...not to mention he doesn't have the cajones it takes to give a decent apology for the public knee jerk.
His comments were far from Presidential but then what else can be expected of the fool at this point?
I wasn't admonishing you to research all the threads, it's just the arguments were long and drawn out and I've not got the desire to repeat them. That's all.
Well, okay then I will run with it. :mrgreen:
And I obviously disagree, and that's okay.
I think it's pretty much the consensus all around (save a few diehards) that Obama ****ed this up big time.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?